It points out the computer-model simulation that they relied on for their explanation of the fall of WTC 7; and re-iterates their claim that there was "no evidence for explosives". What they did not say:

1. When one does a velocity-time analysis on their simulation (done by physicist David Chandler), one finds that the acceleration of the falling roof is NOT g= 32.2ft/s**2 as observed, but rather much less than g. So their simulation does NOT agree with the observed fall, the data.

2. The video states that the interior of the building first collapsed due to fire, then "the outside shell of the building fell". I have screen-captured the point in the video where this statement is made; attachment. Problems with this model include the fact that the falling "outside shell" mass still must hit lower shell mass, which will impede the motion so that acceleration at g= 32.2ft/s**2 would not be possible. (But that is what is observed in the videos, as admitted to by NIST.)IOW, just because the mass of the floors is (NIST says) out of the way, one must still remove the mass of the lower shell to permit acceleration at g= 32.2ft/s**2 as observed. Math example: 39 floors-worth of "outside shell" hitting just one floor of "outside shell", then by conservation of momentum at time of collision the speed drops by 2.5% (1/40), and the next floor the speed drops by another nearly 2.5% (1/41) -- and already we find this "model" is OUTSIDE the allowed error for the fit to the observed g= 32.2ft/s**2 which I posted earlier. So material must be moved out of the way, according to the data. Further, the observed fall during this 105 feet (over eight floors!) is symmetrical -- the roof does not appreciably tilt to one side during this stage. This means that the otherwise-impeding lower-outside-shell must be removed SYMMETRICALLY and essentially simultaneously. How is this done (without explosives)? NIST just does not mention all this.

3. NIST states that there was "no evidence" for explosives. They said the same thing with regard to the Towers. But did they look for explosive residues? I will quote from my co-authored paper published in the Open Journal of Civil Engineering, which I hope you will read!

Quote

NIST has been asked about this important issue recently, by investigative reporter Jennifer Abel:Abel: "..what about that letter where NIST said it didn't look for evidence of explosives?” Neuman [spokesperson at NIST, listed on the WTC report]: "Right, because there was no evidence of that." Abel: But how can you know there's no evidence if you don't look for it first? Neuman: "If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wast- ing your time... and the taxpayers’ money.” [27].The evident evasiveness of this answer might be humorous if not for the fact that NIST’s approach here affects the lives of so many innocent people. We do not think that looking for thermite or other residues specified in the NFPA 921 code is “wasting your time.” We may be able to help out here as well, for we have looked for such residues in the WTC remains using state-of-the-art analytical methods, especially in the voluminous toxic dust that was produced as the buildings fell and killed thousands of people...

4. NIST failed to mention here that they have adamantly refused to allow me or other scientists to have access to their computer model. Thus, there is no opportunity for peer-review by other scientists, no professional courtesy extended. A result which cannot be challenged does not represent good science.

5. NIST in their final report admitted that they had set the thermal conductivity of steel to ZERO, and that they had the fires burning near the critical column 79 for several HOURS. In reality, the thermal conductivity of steel is not zero, so that heat is transported away from the point where the fire is heating the steel -- wicked away to connected structural beams. NIST turned this heat conductivity to ZERO -- and they're getting away with it! You see, I would like to put reasonable PHYSICAL parameters into the computer simulation -- and see if the building actually will fail and fall at g=32.2ft/s**2 when this is done...

There is more, but I'd really like to get at the LC circuit I'm analyzing. Ciao.

Hurry up and get past the "how the towers fell" part and we can take a crack at "why".

Towers fell, thousands died, we immediately declare war on Terrorism, IRA immediately says they will only seek political solutions as they are not terrorist, we kick off on Afghanistan just before 9/11, invasion of Iraq followed, everyone focuses on "blood for oil" missing the real reasons.

We set quite the infrastructure over there. Even control what they plant for food.

Regarding the chemtrails , what would add some credibility is air samples at ground level before and after a spraying showing a marked increase of new toxins or identifiable strains. I have not seen this information if it is available and will stand corrected if it is presently available.

And, Hawaii is writing a bill to stop the spraying in their area. Not proof? ;]

Regarding the chemtrails , what would add some credibility is air samples at ground level before and after a spraying showing a marked increase of new toxins or identifiable strains. I have not seen this information if it is available and will stand corrected if it is presently available.

It is very sad when people can not see whole picture of mosaic when some details is missing, some details is in wrong place.this is an animal consciousness level when he stay in front of slaughterhouse doors and he can not understand, that this building is for his purpose.it is nothing strange for you in that picture of the sky?:

1. the aluminum tube of airplane can not penetrate steel columns with thickness of tank armor. On this level of speed it's no chance!!! You need to check material physics.All videos with planes are faked.

2. It is no ordinary explosives to pulverize 90% of steel constructions of such buildings in to the dust. only 150 megaton nuclear device.It is lie that government sold steel constructions to China. It was no constructions, only dust. It's survive from pressure of the shock wave of nuclear explosion only very top constructions of WTC1 and WTC2 and nothing of WT7 because it was lesser.

1. the aluminum tube of airplane can not penetrate steel columns with thickness of tank armor. On this level of speed it's no chance!!! You need to check material physics.All videos with planes are faked.

2. It is no ordinary explosives to pulverize 90% of steel constructions of such buildings in to the dust. only 150 megaton nuclear device.It is lie that government sold steel constructions to China. It was no constructions, only dust. It's survive from pressure of the shock wave of nuclear explosion only very top constructions of WTC1 and WTC2 and nothing of WT7 because it was lesser.

Wait, are you really saying that all those amateurs who videotaped the plane hitting the second Tower -- that their videos were faked also? "All videos with planes are faked. " (Let's start with your first point above.)Are you trying to throw in junk science (not evidence-based) here?? It certainly appears so. But I await your explanation.

I don't believe in chemtrails , i do believe that the result of these trails that there is a strong likely hood that it would alter the amount of sun energy allowed to hit the ground and instead be reflected or absorbed by them, what the net result would be i am not sure, during the twin trade towers when planes were not allowed to fly, the temperature rose as a result i believe although i am not that interested in this and cannot say i have really researched it in any depth.

So basically the amount of traffic that is in our Sky's must be affecting us, but this is purely due to the amount of traffic, in the summer here sometimes theres so many it's almost a complete blanket of criss crosses of white haze.

They don't build large metal shears in steel mills that have to cut one or two inch steel with tinfoil aluminum blades. The blades would mushroom and deform instantly. It doesn't matter how fast the blade is moving into the steel, relatively it can be considered that the steel is moving instead of the aircraft aluminum.

I have worked in a steel mill that had these large shears, trust me, a thin aluminum cutter blade would crumple like tin foil against the steel. The box columns shown tysb's drawing demonstrate the immense amount of really strong steel used in the WTC buildings. If it was not strong high grade steel it would have cold flowed out from under the building a long time ago from the immense vertical tonnage it had to support.

The "light bulb group" here will probably counter that you can use water to cut steel if the velocity is high enough. This is true, but it will take an awfully long time. Try it with your pressure washer sometime and a very thin piece of steel.

I am now convinced that the likes of MH and eatenbyagrue have absolutely no experience or feel for that which they conjecture about. It is laughable but sad at the same time. I really wonder what their life and work experience consisted of.

Common sense, it appears, is not so common.

« Last Edit: 2011-12-02, 21:57:03 by ION »

---------------------------

Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.

Wait, are you really saying that all those amateurs who videotaped the plane hitting the second Tower -- that their videos were faked also? "All videos with planes are faked. "

First: You are sure, that they was genuine amateurs?

And yes, all videos with planes were faked. Why you need use the planes (what is very complicated) if they can not penetrate the buildings?. The easiest way is to create video clips and translate its thru controlled mass media, put termite explosives in the place to create the holes. that's it.chek pretty nice straight cuts:

With the amount of attention that the Pentagon no-plane theories have received, it shouldn't be surprising that some would also make the bizarre claim that no 767s hit the World Trade Center, despite voluminous video and photographic evidence to the contrary. My previous articles dealt with the core of these claims at length. Those articles were lengthy, so the purpose of this review is to provide a somewhat condensed and updated summary for those new to the subject or lacking in the time to delve into the details of the image analysis.

There have been two no-plane hypotheses put forward: The first, that small planes or missiles hit the towers and these were covered over in the videos and photos of the impact by synthetic 3D graphic images of 767s (including real-time superimposition of these images on all live TV footage as it was broadcast). The no-planers have labeled this scenario "TV Fakery." The second argument holds that the planes (at least the second plane) was in fact a hologram generated by classified technology. This hypothesis has since been abandoned. ...

I invite tysb3 and any others interested to read up on the evidences that REAL PLANES did indeed hit the Towers, reading this paper and the authors other data linked in that article.

I am now convinced that the likes of MH and eatenbyagrue have absolutely no experience or feel for that which they conjecture about. It is laughable but sad at the same time. I really wonder what their life and work experience consisted of.

Common sense, it appears, is not so common.

The personae projected by both MH and ebagare incapable of adopting any viewpoint or beliefwhich is contrary to the established power structure.Their life programming simply will not permit it.

No matter how scientifically sound any data andaccompanying analysis may be they must reject it.It has to do with fear.

Their sense of power is itself derived from theestablishment; they in effect become extensionsof the power of the state. To depart from themainstream would be very fearful as they wouldlose their sense of perceived power over any andall who voice opposition to the establishmentpropaganda. They cannot help themselves; theprogramming is central to their core and linkeddirectly to their emotions.

If the establishment tomorrow changed its tune andreversed all propaganda they would unhesitatinglyfollow course without any qualms. Science is nottheir game - it is about fear and power.

They are only doing as they've been programmed;free choice is not an option.

Underwater nuclear detonation caused a tsunami to hit Japan and destroy their nuclear power plant?

next is that:"The earthquake that generated the great Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 is estimated to have released the energy of 23,000 Hiroshima-type atomic bombs, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)" - was Underwater nuclear detonation toooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!

- the aluminum tube of airplane can not penetrate steel columns with thickness of tank armor. On this level of speed it's no chance!!!

I thoroughly agree with you, but do not rule out that planes or something like planes hit the towers. Whatever hit the WT Center Towers, it should have crumpled like a beer can, with wings shearing off and most of it flattening against the massive steel columns, energy absorbed by virtue of it's structure.

When considering velocity of impact, the mass concentration must be studied carefully. It is not a hardened steel carefully shaped armor piercing projectile, rather it is a large billowy soft structure of aircraft grade thin aluminum. It's tonnage is spread out over many square feet not focused to a steel piercing point. It has built in cushioning and energy absorption by virtue of it's structure, much the way automobiles are designed to absorb energy on impact.

Try aiming your .22 hyper velocity rifle at one of those steel box columns (1435 feet per sec.) and see how far the lead or copper tipped shell penetrates. You will be lucky if you are not killed from the ricochet. This is more than twice the velocity of the plane which was less than 700 feet per second.

So the light bulbs would have you believe there is no need for DU hardened projectiles for armor piercing, it can be done with a very soft material like lead or aluminum providing it has the velocity. By this logic, whole battles could have been won by snipers with .22 's and aluminum bullets against armored divisions. You have to wonder what they are smoking.

---------------------------

Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.

UMMMDo you fellows have any Idea How hard the steel is inside a jet engine?? How hard the front Titanium gear is ,ETC ETC .............

No Planes HUH ??

Any Hoo Have a nice day..............Chet

Chet: I understand how hard the steel of a jet engine is and would expect to see two puncture wounds from them in the building, but not the perfect outline of the whole plane, that is over the top and looks contrived.

I never said there were no planes.

---------------------------

Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.

IonYou Know My Family has much History In the construction supply Biz In NYC ,We Had Tons Of customers All over the city watching from Roof tops after the first impactOne Job was right accross the river In Jersey [I mean Rjght there ] What was it JP morgans Building I think? [One of the Banks I get them all confused?], I never personally saw the impacts But plenty of fellahs did... All Union workers.

I also Took a ten year Hiatus into The demolition Biz In NYC ,I have to tell You ,Once you make a hole all bets are off as far as What happens next.I have plenty of respect for your opinion .

I just can't get my Head around No Planes... Having spoken to Hundreds of Fellahs that saw planes, As a matter of fact Just today A man stopped by Who is in the fire departmentIn NYC he was there during the attacks ,His engine Company lost Most of its Members.We never talk about these kinds Of things In the trades [bad luck] I will ask him a few questions Next time I see him [later this Week].

I submit you are sheeple. I cannot believe you think that the twin towers actually existed. They were merely holograms you fool, and so there were no actual explosions, merely the projection of collapse and then a big hole was blown up in the ground.